I wonder what company you are representing...
No, you are wrong. As I was talking about the iPhone (which has had 330 ppi ever since 2010), I am completely right. You suddenly include a completely different subject and then claim I was wrong. Way to go!
That chart doesn't really mean anything either, not in the least because we're talking about the low end of the spectrum here, which is near the base of that chart where it gets fuzzy. But let's have a look at something a bit more scientific, shall we.
So they basically bragged that they found the perfect pixel density @ 330 ppi... which is even worse.
In reality, they sticked with that pixel density because they have very strict (pixel-based) design constraints for their platform.
....Which proves my point
Perhaps I should have said Apple fans, but I wanted to avoid offending SuperKendall and the AC he was responding to. They were clearly saying that more pixels is bad, in case you missed it.
Well it's what happened with the old 3.5 inch screens, with the awkward 3:2 aspect ratio. Don't forget that the iPhone 5 (with the 4" screen) was not released until march 2013.
This time it's the screen resolution... Apple has always bragged about their high resolution retina displays, and now that they're lacking in that department, all of a sudden high resolution is a bad thing and Apple's retina are the "perfect resolution".
Apple - making significant disadvantages of their iDevices sound like good things (tm).
The old "perfect size / one size fits all" 3.5" display comes to mind...
Sorry, I missed the proper meaning of that 1.8 million figure.
What? 50.000 / 1.800.000 sounds like 3%
But from the perspective of ethics and morality, there is no difference — both are about equally reprehensible.
That's a moralistic fallacy. You could argue that, morally, there is no difference between murder and fraud, and not be wrong. Morality is subjective and my morals are different from yours.
Exactly. No difference whatsoever.
So when a friend lends me a DVD and I copy it, who did I stole from? From my friend, the DVD vendor, the producer, the artists, the factory where the DVD's was produced? Because as far as I understand, the friend still gets to keep his original, unchanged DVD. So the one who whines that he was robbed was actually robbed?
Completely and utterly ridiculous. It's a copyright violation, sure, but theft of actual property? I had no clue that people exist outside Big Media that still believe that lie.
That nobody accepts it does not mean it's not as real. Most merchants in the US also don't accept Japanese Yens, for that matter.
I was arguing that paper money (or virtual money stored in a bank) does not have any inherent value, which is also the case with Bitcoin. It all merely "works" because everybody accepts it.
Oh God, here we go comparing IP to actual physical property again.
We gave more blood, sweat and tears in exchange for more worthless paper money (if at all). So what's the difference between "real money" and bitcoin again? In the realness department, that is?
Read between the lines. This is filed under 'Undesirable side effects of contemporary copyright law'.
The DMCA is at it again.